First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Owensboro, KY

#62 Mar 21, 2013
Man up wrote:
<quoted text>Landslide had nothing to do anything. It was about predicting a Romney win. Plain and simple. Besides, you making up new details still doesn't change the fact that you'd rather appear insane than just admit you lied and move on.
I'll make it easy for you. Here is the exact post.

asdfgh | Monday Feb 18
TheRealOldSchool wrote:
<quoted text>
Michelle Obama? Viable candidate? That's probably the funniest thing I've heard all year.

What was the funniest thing from last year? Fox News predicting a landslide victory for Romney?
Reply
Report this post

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Owensboro, KY

#63 Mar 21, 2013
Man up wrote:
<quoted text>Landslide had nothing to do anything. It was about predicting a Romney win. Plain and simple. Besides, you making up new details still doesn't change the fact that you'd rather appear insane than just admit you lied and move on.
So who's making up new details now?
Haha

Centertown, KY

#64 Mar 21, 2013
Man up wrote:
<quoted text>
Landslide had nothing to do anything. It was about predicting a Romney win. Plain and simple. Besides, you making up new details still doesn't change the fact that you'd rather appear insane than just admit you lied and move on.
TheRealOldSchool is definitely whacked in the head. He'll change the subject and add things that aren't there just to keep the discussion off point. Any conversation with him becomes a clusterfuck of the nonsense he's pulling now.
Really

Tucker, GA

#65 Mar 21, 2013
TheRealOldSchool wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll make it easy for you. Here is the exact post.
asdfgh | Monday Feb 18
TheRealOldSchool wrote:
<quoted text>
Michelle Obama? Viable candidate? That's probably the funniest thing I've heard all year.
What was the funniest thing from last year? Fox News predicting a landslide victory for Romney?
Reply
Report this post
That statement has nothing to with the person who posted the google results that you're lying about. The intent was to show how disingenuous their reporting was. Nice try at deflecting, though.
Really

Tucker, GA

#66 Mar 21, 2013
TheRealOldSchool wrote:
<quoted text>
So who's making up new details now?
YOU are making up details now, as usual. The search results were titled "fox news predicts romney win". Nothing changes the fact that you made a such a fool of yourself by pretending something right in front of your face didn't exist. I don't know how old you are, but it's hard to believe that you're an adult.
Get Over It

Owensboro, KY

#67 Mar 21, 2013
Really wrote:
<quoted text>YOU are making up details now, as usual. The search results were titled "fox news predicts romney win". Nothing changes the fact that you made a such a fool of yourself by pretending something right in front of your face didn't exist. I don't know how old you are, but it's hard to believe that you're an adult.
So, why would someone post a google search page that doesn't prove what they said? If they said landslide, then don't post a link that doesn't back up the statement as proof. And you arguing a point that is clearly been discredited just makes you look like an idiot too.

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Owensboro, KY

#68 Mar 21, 2013
Really wrote:
<quoted text>YOU are making up details now, as usual. The search results were titled "fox news predicts romney win". Nothing changes the fact that you made a such a fool of yourself by pretending something right in front of your face didn't exist. I don't know how old you are, but it's hard to believe that you're an adult.
So, the person says Fox predicted a landslide win. Then they backed it up with search results titled 'fox news predicts Romney win'. What is it that I am pretending doesn't exist? Please do tell. He said landslide. I posted the link to the comment. If you can't see it, you really aren't worth arguing. Keep on exaggerating like the rest of the left...just like the scare about the sequester. Fear and deceit. It won you the last 2 elections and sadly, it will probably continue to win you elections.
Really

Tucker, GA

#69 Mar 21, 2013
Get Over It wrote:
<quoted text>
So, why would someone post a google search page that doesn't prove what they said? If they said landslide, then don't post a link that doesn't back up the statement as proof. And you arguing a point that is clearly been discredited just makes you look like an idiot too.
Nice try, TheRealOldSchool. Stop trying to pretend that you didn't act like you couldn't read search results. No details change that you lied about that. The results speak for themselves. The point that Fox News had so many so-called experts misleading viewers was made. Much like News Corps Republican party, you don't get it. Too bad for you the world is moving on without you.
asdfgh

Centertown, KY

#70 Mar 21, 2013
TheRealOldSchool wrote:
<quoted text>
So, the person says Fox predicted a landslide win. Then they backed it up with search results titled 'fox news predicts Romney win'. What is it that I am pretending doesn't exist? Please do tell. He said landslide. I posted the link to the comment. If you can't see it, you really aren't worth arguing. Keep on exaggerating like the rest of the left...just like the scare about the sequester. Fear and deceit. It won you the last 2 elections and sadly, it will probably continue to win you elections.
The point of me showing you that Google search result in the first place was to give you examples of how clueless Fox pundits were because of so many predicting a Romney victory. I mentioned Karl Rove saying "landslide victory" because he was the most prominent person to quote. Whether a pundit said "landslide victory", "victory" or just "win" made no difference. It was all to prove the same thing. Never before on any network have so many experts been so recklessly off with presidential predictions. I showed you pages of these examples and you acted like it was only one. That's why I figured you were too dishonest to continue any further discussion.

Level 1

Since: Dec 12

Owensboro, KY

#71 Mar 21, 2013
asdfgh wrote:
<quoted text>The point of me showing you that Google search result in the first place was to give you examples of how clueless Fox pundits were because of so many predicting a Romney victory. I mentioned Karl Rove saying "landslide victory" because he was the most prominent person to quote. Whether a pundit said "landslide victory", "victory" or just "win" made no difference. It was all to prove the same thing. Never before on any network have so many experts been so recklessly off with presidential predictions. I showed you pages of these examples and you acted like it was only one. That's why I figured you were too dishonest to continue any further discussion.
I predicted an Obama victory too. What's the point in trying to prove something so miniscule? I may not agree with you about politics, but one thing I am not is dishonest. I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong as I've done before. Attacking one's character doesn't make you any smarter or more right than I am. Continue arguing your leftist agenda, but at least do it with a little more class in the future.
Hmmmm

Centertown, KY

#72 Mar 21, 2013
TheRealOldSchool wrote:
<quoted text>
I predicted an Obama victory too. What's the point in trying to prove something so miniscule? I may not agree with you about politics, but one thing I am not is dishonest. I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong as I've done before. Attacking one's character doesn't make you any smarter or more right than I am. Continue arguing your leftist agenda, but at least do it with a little more class in the future.
Whatever that means. So...did you finally figure out that Google and other Internet search results have corresponding pages after the first page? No wonder you keep avoiding that discussion. Because that lame excuse only makes you come off as stupid or a liar. You should've just been honest to begin with.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Owensboro Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Home wreckers 1 min Wishing 10
Whitney Baugn 1 min MrtAco 1
Looking for a big titty girl to mess with 46 min Azazel 10
Donald trump 54 min Rush Limbaugh 9
Friends ... 1 hr FIREPANTIES 6
Delisha Miller 1 hr InternetHard 10
Is there a certain reason my post keeps being d... 1 hr Shop Girl 11

Owensboro Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Owensboro Mortgages